Life expectancy of a scandium frame???

[18DAI]

No confusion here. I was speaking to durability. To me, the lack of "hardness" you refer to, would indicate a less durable frame. Regards 18DAI.

 

[Drail]

Bang a piece of steel into a piece of softer alloy and that's what happens. I personally won't sacrifice durability for weight reduction. Considering the cost of these guns they should be made of steel.

 

[Wayne M]

The bright spot of wear you see on your frame from the yoke contacting it is normal. Don't worry. The only worry spots are the two piece barrel staying together and the blast shield in the top strap above the forcing cone not being flame cut into multiple pieces. Check both often. Old guys like me are supersticious but we've found that one piece barrels and steel frames eliminate possible problems which could occur at an inconvenient time.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

Originally posted by Wayne M:
The bright spot of wear you see on your frame from the yoke contacting it is normal. Don't worry. The only worry spots are the two piece barrel staying together and the blast shield in the top strap above the forcing cone not being flame cut into multiple pieces. Check both often. Old guys like me are supersticious but we've found that one piece barrels and steel frames eliminate possible problems which could occur at an inconvenient time.

I have a pair of 340PD's, one with about 100 rds and one with about 1,000 rds. They both have the same wear markings and they both function perfectly.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

Originally posted by Superheat:
I was at the range and a couple of guys were talking about BUG's and how they would shoot more if they had a steel J frame. Why? I asked. They said the aluminum and SCANDIUM frames wear out and they didn't want to wear out their guns.
...

Maybe these guys just don't want to admit that shooting the light guns simply HURTS. The lighter the gun and the hotter your ammo, the more it hurts. I do about 50% of my practice with a 317 .22 'cause it's cheap and harmles to my hand, another 40% with light loads in my 340PD, and only about 10% with duty loads in the 340.

 

[shorty500]

the shiny spot immediately under the barrel shank is 100% NORMAL. when you put either a black andodized or powder coat finish on aluminum and then subject it to friction from opening and closing the cylinder plus the slam/bam/thank you ma'am that it gets under recoil the finish gives up the ghost! you should be noticing a shiny curved mark on the recoil shield also where the center pin is rubbing as you open/shut the cylinder to load/unload. what seems strange to me is the shiny spot on bottom edge of the extractor rod cut-out in the barrel shroud. there should be ZERO wear there and in the picture it almost looks like a beveled line or chamfered edge. that's strange and warrants a further investigation of the revolver.

 

[hd28cw]

If you wear out a revolver, thats a great reason to buy another one look at it as a goal.... Remeber they're made to shoot, not to stare at, scratches add character!!!

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Life of Scandium Frames

14,387 rounds J frame .357
20,840 rounds N frame .357
17,967 rounds N Frame .44 mag.
If just specials are used ( .38 or 44)then use a multilpier of 1.43876
Steel frame -use a multiplier of 16.5784 for magnums and 486.9768 for specials.

 

[M29since14]

I was planning on shooting this gun for competition for years to come. If it will wear out I am going to sell it. Does S&W warranty this wear??

I am not a competitive shooter but I used to shoot a lot. I have had lightweight Commanders since I was a young lad. Still have my original one in .38 Super, and one purchased a few years later in .45 auto. They're both from the late sixties.

I shot the .45 a lot more than the Super. The Super cracked its frame maybe ten years ago. It probably had 10% of the rounds through it the .45 has had. The .45 has been shot so much that the slide has been refinished at least three times. It is just as accurate and reliable now as it ever has been, but it could break tomorrow.

Your Smith with the Scandium frame should have better material in it than the Colts have. If purchased new, it probably has the best warranty in the business. I bet you will shoot a lot of rounds through that gun without trouble, and if you do have some trouble, I think S&W will handle it fairly. You can't really predict when things are going to break, so if you like the 327, why get rid of it? I'd use it as intended and handle whatever problems you have as they occur. If a pattern of trouble develops and it is more than you are willing to put up with, that is the time to get rid of the gun, IMHO.

 

[Old cop]

I have a Model 38 made in 1962 & a Colt Cobra from 1968. Both are going strong and I shoot them often.

 

[stantheman86]

Many people worry too much about the "lifespan" of their guns.

Unless you shoot a ton, the average shooter won't wear out a S&W revolver, alloy frame or not.

Think of it this way, for a non-reloader, a case of 1,000 rounds of .357 will run you about $400. Say an alloy frame .357 will shoot loose in 20,000 rounds......it would cost you $8,000 in ammo to "wear it out". The $400-500 cost of the gun is a drop in the bucket compared to what it costs to wear out.

I also shoot Rugers, and many competition shooters have 100,000+ rounds on GP100's and Blackhawks. The cost of this, even for a reloader, is staggering. I own so many revolvers, I don't expect to see the day any of them wear out in my lifetime, even the "well used" ones. Between my work schedule and making it to the range even twice a month being a dream right now........plus money for ammo.......I'll be retired before I probably even get a chance to put the first 1,000 through some of my wheelguns. I used to stress about "putting too many rounds" through my guns, but the truth is I don't have the time to even worry about this right now.

Still, if I were to buy a gun with the intent of shooting it a lot, I wouldn't go for a Scandium.

 

[Practical]

Bang a piece of steel into a piece of softer alloy and that's what happens. I personally won't sacrifice durability for weight reduction. Considering the cost of these guns they should be made of steel.

The reason they cost more is because they are light and made of expensive materials...

Frankly, steel guns cost less.

They should just sell a pair of 2 - 1 steel and one lite-weight.

 

[M29since14]

Many people worry too much about the "lifespan" of their guns...

Think of it this way, for a non-reloader, a case of 1,000 rounds of .357 will run you about $400. Say an alloy frame .357 will shoot loose in 20,000 rounds......it would cost you $8,000 in ammo to "wear it out". The $400-500 cost of the gun is a drop in the bucket compared to what it costs to wear out.

Exactly. You can adjust those numbers around to suit the individual circumstance, but that is the principle I have always considered. Any machine will wear and eventually require repair or replacement. As long as the economics are not too unbalanced, I'm OK with Aluminum.

As Stan says, if you plan to do a LOT of shooting with the particular gun in question, just buy steel. Aluminum alloy guns are great for reducing the weight of a gun meant to be carried, and the gun can still be very serviceable, but if longevity is a major concern and carrying weight is not, then common sense favors steel.

 

[off road]

For me, any of the light frame guns are frequently carried, but seldom fired. I have plenty of steel frame versions for practice, so why risk wearing out an light very expensive model?

 

[Maximumbob54]

Here comes Bob’s opinion, plug your ears if you don’t want to hear me… I think alloy frames are a **** shoot. I have seen guns with little wear that have supposedly been fired on a regular and I have seen new in box unfired save for the factory one or proofs that has a frame crack. I don’t even know when my 637 cracked on me. I only found it during the process of refinishing it. You may get an Airweight or Airlite that won’t die and you may have yours go loose or crack in no time. I have decided that the ease of carry of the J frame Airweight outdoes the risk of them dying as long as I keep the round count low enough to where I know POI is when I pull the trigger. This just isn’t a gun that will be changing on me. I don’t need to go out and hammer countless rounds through it to know it works. Maybe once I get my 637 back I won’t feel so sore about alloy. But once you have it happen to you it really hits home. The ILS in the 637 was enough of a slap in my face. Maybe that gun was just a Monday morning / Friday afternoon lemon. Either way she is gone for repair now.

 

[off road]

I have decided that the ease of carry of the J frame Airweight outdoes the risk of them dying as long as I keep the round count low enough to where I know POI is when I pull the trigger. This just isn’t a gun that will be changing on me. I don’t need to go out and hammer countless rounds through it to know it works.

Well said!

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I've owned revolvers for over 40 years and will only shoot steel. I regularly shoot a 36 2" and have shot a 642 for comparison. The extra 4 to 5 ounces of weight (in the 36) make a noticeable difference to me in recoil and recovery, for a second shot. Having said this, I realize age is a factor in my decision. The younger you are the more accepting of new technology and change you will be. That doesn't make us (older folks) right or wrong, just different.

 

[dla]

If S&W lacked it's outstanding Customer Service, I would care about longevity.

 

[rz625-8]

I am from the old school of revolvers and 1911s. All steel and very,very,very,very,very,little to worry about. Scandiums,from my own point of view,JUNK TO WATCH OUT FOR IN THE FUTURE WITH COMPUTERIZED,MANMADE PROBLEM GUNs.

 

[J D Allen]

S&W frame repair

I can tell you from having a 40 caliber pistol repaired at a service center. Smith and wesson's service is #1. No matter what happens to your handgun it will be repaired. This is why I have 5 smith & wesson handguns. Just know they stand behind their warranty.